• Alina Habba resigns as acting U.S. Attorney for New Jersey amid court ruling on her unlawful appointment.
• The Third Circuit Court of Appeals found Habba's appointment violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
• Habba will continue in a new role as senior adviser to Attorney General Pam Bondi.
• The resignation comes after a protracted legal controversy affecting federal prosecutions.
• Attorney General Bondi criticizes the court's decision, calling it politically motivated.

Alina Habba, the acting U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, has resigned following a ruling from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals which deemed her appointment unlawful. The court's unanimous decision found Habba violated the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, confirming she was not authorized to serve in that role. Habba announced her decision via social media, stating, "to protect the stability and integrity of the office which I love, I have decided to step down in my role as the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey," reiterating, "But do not mistake my compliance for surrender" according to ABC News, The Hill, CBS News, and Reuters.

Despite her resignation, Habba will retain a position within the Justice Department as a senior adviser to Attorney General Pam Bondi, focusing on U.S. Attorneys across the country. In her post, she emphasized that this decision should not weaken her resolve or the Department of Justice, highlighting her previous achievements in fighting crime while in office. Bondi accepted her resignation but criticized the court's ruling, arguing it renders it "untenable" for Habba to fulfill her duties effectively, as reported by BBC and NPR.

Habba's tenure as U.S. Attorney has been contentious, with her appointment facing multiple legal challenges and criticisms regarding qualifications and experience. Following a series of legal maneuvers from the Trump administration to maintain her position after initial term limits were reached, the legal battles created significant procedural disruptions in New Jersey's federal courts. Her role had come under scrutiny due to her prior service as a personal counsel to Trump, which has been seen by some as a conflict of interest. The appeals court ruling thus underscores a larger issue within the Trump administration regarding the appointment of loyalists to high legal positions, as detailed by Los Angeles Times and Al Jazeera.